Electrons exposed to time-dependent force

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the momentum change of an electron exposed to a time-dependent force as described in Ashcroft and Mermin's text. The key point is that the momentum change includes a term of order dt^2 due to the non-constancy of the force f(t) over time. This term arises from applying a first-order Taylor series expansion to express the force at t+dt. While Newton's second law suggests a simpler relationship, the additional term reflects the nuances of time-dependent forces. The clarification highlights the importance of considering the force's variation when calculating momentum changes.
M-Speezy
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I have begun studying Ashcroft + Mermin on my own, and am trying to follow the math in the text. They suggest that an electron in a metal with some momentum p(t) and exposed to a force f(t) will at some time later (t+dt) have a contribution to the momentum on the order of f(t)dt plus another term on the order of dt*dt. My question is where does this dt^2 term enter? My instinct is to say that F=dp/dt, and that the change in momentum can then be given (very simplistically?) by f(t)dt. Obviously, a form of f(t) and an integral is in order, but I cannot see the logic of what is stated in the text.

Any and all help or guidance on the matter would be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The term of order dt^2 comes from the fact that f(t) is not necessarily constant in time. It is related to the derivative of f(t).
 
Orodruin said:
The term of order dt^2 comes from the fact that f(t) is not necessarily constant in time. It is related to the derivative of f(t).
Why does this matter, though? I would think Newton's 2nd law would be used, and then a change in the momentum would simply be given by f(t)dt. I'm not sure what else should be done to lead to anything else.
 
It is just using Newton's second law, but Newton's second law is just the limit when dt goes to zero and so agrees with your result.
 
I figured it out I think. If the force at t+dt is instead expressed using a first-order approximated taylor series, then the extra dt comes out.
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top